ArticleDrug and alcohol review2025
Assessing the Processes and Experiences of Using and Implementing a Routine Data Collection System at Two Aboriginal Alcohol and Other Drug Residential Services Located in Rural Queensland.
Article in Drug and alcohol review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRoutine data collection in alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment services is essential for continuous quality improvement, yet its implementation in Aboriginal residential services remains challenging. This study evaluates the processes and experiences of implementing a routine data collection system at two Aboriginal AOD residential rehabilitation services in rural Queensland, both of which operate under a family-centric model of care.
methodsA participatory evaluation approach was used, engaging staff and clients to co-design and implement data collection tools. The study progressed in two phases. Phase 1 focused on developing data collection tools. Phase 2 involved implementing these tools to assess client experiences and outcomes. Data collection included the Aboriginal Resilience and Recovery Questionnaire, WHOQOL-BREF and other validated AOD outcome measures, with surveys conducted at multiple time points.
resultsStaff engagement was crucial to successful implementation, though maintaining involvement over time proved challenging. Logistical and financial barriers, including IT infrastructure limitations and staff turnover, impacted sustainability. Although post-treatment follow-up was difficult, many clients found the outcome survey to be a valuable therapeutic tool. The client experience survey led to direct service improvements, whereas outcome monitoring required additional refinement for long-term feasibility. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsRoutine data collection can enhance service quality and client outcomes when embedded into clinical practice. However, sustainability depends on staff buy-in, streamlined processes and dedicated resources. Addressing barriers to post-treatment follow-up and ensuring data collection remains relevant to both staff and clients will be essential for ongoing implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.